From philipp.wieder at udo.edu Wed Jul 1 06:30:17 2009 From: philipp.wieder at udo.edu (Philipp Wieder) Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:30:17 +0200 Subject: [jsdl-wg] JSDL Teleconference - 1 July 2009 **@12:00pm UTC** In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A4B48C9.5050505@udo.edu> Dear All, I may be late, so please do not wait for me. Best regards, Philipp. Andreas Savva wrote: > ** NOTE TIME SLOT ** > > Agenda: > 1. Agenda bashing & quick status update > We were evenly split for this call. Depending on quorum & > progress this might be a quick call with a followup next > week > 2. Activity instance document schema > - Check progress on issues/actions on tracker > https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/projects.jsdl-wg/tracker.activity_schema > - Draft discussion > > ===== Full call-in details ==== > > Date: 1 July 2009 > Time: UTC 12:00 PM > EUROPE: BST 1 PM / CEST 2 PM > US: EDT 8 AM > ASIA: JST 9 PM > Duration: 1 hour > > Dial-in numbers (toll): > US: +1 718 3541071 (New York) or > +1 408 9616509 (San Jose) > UK: +44 207 3655269 (London) > Germany: +49 (0)69 50070802 (Frankfurt) > Japan: +81 3 3570 8225 (Tokyo) > Other countries: http://tinyurl.com/eg48j > User guide: http://tinyurl.com/qknrf > Teleconference participant PIN: 4371991 > Screen share: http://jsdl.glance.net/?key=0701 > > Note: When you dial in after the initial message in English for the PIN > there is another message in Japanese only (sorry) to state your name and > press '#' in order to join the call. > From alexander.papaspyrou at tu-dortmund.de Wed Jul 1 07:02:25 2009 From: alexander.papaspyrou at tu-dortmund.de (Alexander Papaspyrou) Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 14:02:25 +0200 Subject: [jsdl-wg] JSDL Teleconference - 1 July 2009 **@12:00pm UTC** In-Reply-To: <4A4B48C9.5050505@udo.edu> References: <4A4B48C9.5050505@udo.edu> Message-ID: <67829E4D-37A2-4DB8-ACEA-CA0CCB41B51C@tu-dortmund.de> All, I'm stuck in a meeting which seems to last forever. I might drop in 10 mins late, if we can get to an end here. If I don't, I will not make it. Sorry for the late notice. -Alexander Am 01.07.2009 um 13:30 schrieb Philipp Wieder: > Dear All, > > I may be late, so please do not wait for me. > > Best regards, Philipp. > > Andreas Savva wrote: >> ** NOTE TIME SLOT ** >> >> Agenda: >> 1. Agenda bashing & quick status update >> We were evenly split for this call. Depending on >> quorum & >> progress this might be a quick call with a followup >> next >> week >> 2. Activity instance document schema >> - Check progress on issues/actions on tracker >> https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/projects.jsdl-wg/tracker.activity_schema >> - Draft discussion >> >> ===== Full call-in details ==== >> >> Date: 1 July 2009 >> Time: UTC 12:00 PM >> EUROPE: BST 1 PM / CEST 2 PM >> US: EDT 8 AM >> ASIA: JST 9 PM >> Duration: 1 hour >> >> Dial-in numbers (toll): >> US: +1 718 3541071 (New >> York) or >> +1 408 9616509 (San >> Jose) >> UK: +44 207 3655269 (London) >> Germany: +49 (0)69 50070802 >> (Frankfurt) >> Japan: +81 3 3570 8225 (Tokyo) >> Other countries: http://tinyurl.com/eg48j >> User guide: http://tinyurl.com/qknrf >> Teleconference participant PIN: 4371991 >> Screen share: http://jsdl.glance.net/?key=0701 >> >> Note: When you dial in after the initial message in English for the >> PIN >> there is another message in Japanese only (sorry) to state your >> name and >> press '#' in order to join the call. >> > -- > jsdl-wg mailing list > jsdl-wg at ogf.org > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsdl-wg -- Alexander Papaspyrou alexander.papaspyrou at tu-dortmund.de -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Alexander Papaspyrou.vcf Type: text/directory Size: 498 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/jsdl-wg/attachments/20090701/840a0fd2/attachment.bin -------------- next part -------------- From andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com Wed Jul 1 07:50:32 2009 From: andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com (Andreas Savva) Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:50:32 +0900 Subject: [jsdl-wg] Next call (was Re: JSDL Teleconference - 1 July 2009 **@12:00pm UTC**) In-Reply-To: <67829E4D-37A2-4DB8-ACEA-CA0CCB41B51C@tu-dortmund.de> References: <4A4B48C9.5050505@udo.edu> <67829E4D-37A2-4DB8-ACEA-CA0CCB41B51C@tu-dortmund.de> Message-ID: Hi, In the end we didn't have quorum today so we adjourned for next week. Would July 8, 12:00 UTC, same time as today be convenient? Please let me know if it's not. Andreas On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:02:25 +0900, Alexander Papaspyrou wrote: > All, > > I'm stuck in a meeting which seems to last forever. I might drop in 10 > mins late, if we can get to an end here. If I don't, I will not make it. > > Sorry for the late notice. > > -Alexander > > Am 01.07.2009 um 13:30 schrieb Philipp Wieder: > >> Dear All, >> >> I may be late, so please do not wait for me. >> >> Best regards, Philipp. >> >> Andreas Savva wrote: >>> ** NOTE TIME SLOT ** >>> >>> Agenda: >>> 1. Agenda bashing & quick status update >>> We were evenly split for this call. Depending on >>> quorum & >>> progress this might be a quick call with a followup >>> next >>> week >>> 2. Activity instance document schema >>> - Check progress on issues/actions on tracker >>> https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/projects.jsdl-wg/tracker.activity_schema >>> - Draft discussion >>> >>> ===== Full call-in details ==== >>> >>> Date: 1 July 2009 >>> Time: UTC 12:00 PM >>> EUROPE: BST 1 PM / CEST 2 PM >>> US: EDT 8 AM >>> ASIA: JST 9 PM >>> Duration: 1 hour >>> -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd From andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com Tue Jul 7 08:12:54 2009 From: andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com (Andreas Savva) Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:12:54 +0900 Subject: [jsdl-wg] JSDL Teleconference - 8 July 2009 **@12:00pm UTC** Message-ID: Agenda: 1. Agenda bashing & quick status update 2. Activity instance document schema - Check progress on issues/actions on tracker https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/projects.jsdl-wg/tracker.activity_schema - Draft discussion ===== Full call-in details ==== Date: 8 July 2009 Time: UTC 12:00 PM EUROPE: BST 1 PM / CEST 2 PM US: EDT 8 AM ASIA: JST 9 PM Duration: 1 hour Dial-in numbers (toll): US: +1 718 3541071 (New York) or +1 408 9616509 (San Jose) UK: +44 207 3655269 (London) Germany: +49 (0)69 50070802 (Frankfurt) Japan: +81 3 3570 8225 (Tokyo) Other countries: http://tinyurl.com/eg48j User guide: http://tinyurl.com/qknrf Teleconference participant PIN: 4371991 Screen share: http://jsdl.glance.net/?key=0808 Note: When you dial in after the initial message in English for the PIN there is another message in Japanese only (sorry) to state your name and press '#' in order to join the call. -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd From grimshaw at virginia.edu Tue Jul 14 11:58:52 2009 From: grimshaw at virginia.edu (Andrew Grimshaw) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:58:52 -0400 Subject: [jsdl-wg] [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th In-Reply-To: <4A5C525E.5000509@pd.infn.it> References: <4A5C525E.5000509@pd.infn.it> Message-ID: Moreno, Once we figure out what we need I can start the process to get a new draft of BES out. Besides the state model - where we seem to have reached a consensus, and the "vector" operations, there is also the issue of moving towards GLUE2 as the attribute schema which has been discussed several times. We will need to be specific as to what part of GLUE2, and how to get the info from endpoints (we could keep the current mechanism). Finally, there is JSDL. It would be good if we could synchronize the transition to GLUE2 with the JSDL group. I am cc'ing the JSDL group as they may be able to better answer the question of JSDL and GLUE2 congruence (if there are any such plans.) A > -----Original Message----- > From: pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf Of > Moreno Marzolla > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 5:40 AM > To: pgi-wg at ogf.org > Subject: [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th > > Dear all, > > the next PGI teleconference will be held tomorrow july 15th > at 16:00 CET (duration: 1 hour). > > Call-in details as follow: > via Skype call +9900827049931906 (free of charge) ordinary phone numbers > (local rates) with the 9931906 conference number: > > Austria 0820 401 15470 > Belgium 0703 57 134 > France 0826 109 071 > Germany +49 (0) 180 500 9527 > Switzerland 0848 560 397 > > The agenda is similar to the last call (in particular, tomorrow I would > like that we spend a few minutes on a status update of the security > discussion) > > 1) State model > > 2) Status update on security > > 3) AOB > > Feel free to propose additional topics for discussion. > > Moreno. > > -- > Moreno Marzolla > INFN Sezione di Padova, via Marzolo 8, 35131 PADOVA, Italy > EMail: moreno.marzolla at pd.infn.it Phone: +39 049 8277103 > WWW : http://www.dsi.unive.it/~marzolla Fax : +39 049 8756233 > > _______________________________________________ > Pgi-wg mailing list > Pgi-wg at ogf.org > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg From grimshaw at virginia.edu Tue Jul 14 15:27:21 2009 From: grimshaw at virginia.edu (Andrew Grimshaw) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:27:21 -0400 Subject: [jsdl-wg] [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th In-Reply-To: <4A5CDABD.3090709@cern.ch> References: <4A5C525E.5000509@pd.infn.it> <4A5CDABD.3090709@cern.ch> Message-ID: <922E3100F6D44EAE956AE2589F2D6406@cs.virginia.edu> Laurence, First, as you can tell I am not a GLUE2 expert - nor am I keeping up with JSDL 2.0. :-) That said, as to your comment > One of the problems with getting the information from BES is that this > is then a service specific mechanism and other services such as the SRM, > etc. will have a different method. Information system interoperation is > indeed problem which we must solve but we need to deal with things in > manageable chunks. I agree completely. During the BES discussion we came to an impasse over this: some arguing that that we could use WS-RF resource properties ... and then have a single mechanism for all types of resources. Others, including but not limited to Microsoft, would have nothing to do with WS-RF. In the end to get consensus the WG decided on a separate function - very ugly. We in Genesis II support both the WS-RF mechanism and the OGSA-BES mechanism. The same thing by the way happened over notification, except in the end the WG basically punted. I personally think that the BES endpoint should provide a mechanism to get the information, but that the spec should be mute on how that information is aggregated or used. A > -----Original Message----- > From: Laurence Field [mailto:Laurence.Field at cern.ch] > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:22 PM > To: Andrew Grimshaw > Cc: Moreno Marzolla; pgi-wg at ogf.org; jsdl-wg at ogf.org > Subject: Re: [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th > > Hi Andrew, > > The most important aspects of GLUE2 for this activity is the GLUE > execution environment and GLUE application environment. It describes the > hardware and software properties of the cluster respectively and the Job > Description should mirror this information. > > Currently, this information is propagated around the Grid infrastructure > via a parallel mechanism. Whether this needs to be part of BES or if > there is an information service which must accompany BES is a matter for > debate. Within the current EGEE/WLCG infrastructure there are no plans > for the foreseeable future to move away from the current mechanism, the > need to expose this information via BES is not a requirement for it to > be deployed on the infrastructure. > > One of the problems with getting the information from BES is that this > is then a service specific mechanism and other services such as the SRM, > etc. will have a different method. Information system interoperation is > indeed problem which we must solve but we need to deal with things in > manageable chunks. I would consider this problem to be a general Grid > interoperability problem rather than something specific to BES so we > should try not get too distracted from the good progress that has been > made so far. The definition of GLUE 2.0 has solved more than half of > the information system interoperability problem. As the information > content is standardized, moving it around and translating from one data > format to another is just a technical plumbing exercise. Having > something standardized here would certainly help but it is probably out > of scope for the BES discussion. > > Anyway, my personal opinion on the information system standards is that > a good one already exists, X.500 :) > > Laurence > > > Andrew Grimshaw wrote: > > Moreno, > > Once we figure out what we need I can start the process to get a new > draft > > of BES out. > > > > Besides the state model - where we seem to have reached a consensus, and > the > > "vector" operations, there is also the issue of moving towards GLUE2 as > the > > attribute schema which has been discussed several times. We will need to > be > > specific as to what part of GLUE2, and how to get the info from > endpoints > > (we could keep the current mechanism). > > > > Finally, there is JSDL. It would be good if we could synchronize the > > transition to GLUE2 with the JSDL group. I am cc'ing the JSDL group as > they > > may be able to better answer the question of JSDL and GLUE2 congruence > (if > > there are any such plans.) > > > > A > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf > Of > >> Moreno Marzolla > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 5:40 AM > >> To: pgi-wg at ogf.org > >> Subject: [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th > >> > >> Dear all, > >> > >> the next PGI teleconference will be held tomorrow july 15th > >> at 16:00 CET (duration: 1 hour). > >> > >> Call-in details as follow: > >> via Skype call +9900827049931906 (free of charge) ordinary phone > numbers > >> (local rates) with the 9931906 conference number: > >> > >> Austria 0820 401 15470 > >> Belgium 0703 57 134 > >> France 0826 109 071 > >> Germany +49 (0) 180 500 9527 > >> Switzerland 0848 560 397 > >> > >> The agenda is similar to the last call (in particular, tomorrow I would > >> like that we spend a few minutes on a status update of the security > >> discussion) > >> > >> 1) State model > >> > >> 2) Status update on security > >> > >> 3) AOB > >> > >> Feel free to propose additional topics for discussion. > >> > >> Moreno. > >> > >> -- > >> Moreno Marzolla > >> INFN Sezione di Padova, via Marzolo 8, 35131 PADOVA, Italy > >> EMail: moreno.marzolla at pd.infn.it Phone: +39 049 8277103 > >> WWW : http://www.dsi.unive.it/~marzolla Fax : +39 049 8756233 > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Pgi-wg mailing list > >> Pgi-wg at ogf.org > >> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pgi-wg mailing list > > Pgi-wg at ogf.org > > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg > > From oxana.smirnova at hep.lu.se Tue Jul 14 17:43:02 2009 From: oxana.smirnova at hep.lu.se (Oxana Smirnova) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 00:43:02 +0200 Subject: [jsdl-wg] [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th In-Reply-To: <4A5D0259.4010607@cern.ch> References: <4A5C525E.5000509@pd.infn.it> <4A5CDABD.3090709@cern.ch> <922E3100F6D44EAE956AE2589F2D6406@cs.virginia.edu> <4A5D0259.4010607@cern.ch> Message-ID: <4A5D09F6.9010408@hep.lu.se> Hi all, FWIW, I have mixed feelings on this issue. 4 years ago I thought it would be just great to have exactly the same interface and end-point for job submission/management, for information query, and for file management. We even do have the same interface for job and file management: job is largely characterized by a set of files, after all. And information persistency may well be realized as a set of files, too - why not. But then I killed a job by accident, being sure I deleted a file. So now I think a clear separation is a good think to do. Cheers, Oxana 2009-07-15 00:10, Laurence Field ?????: > Hi Andrew, > > With the diverse types of services that we deal with in our > infrastructure, I can't imagine a situation where they have all > implemented an interface using the same technology. This is due to many > factors including but not limited to: legacy, time scales, priories, > ideologies, trends, fads etc. > However, we have to somehow link all these services together, which is > why I believe that a parallel system is the most flexible option. If an > agreed information interface emerges, the exiting interfaces could be > extended to provide this but the only advantage I see is aesthetics > rather than function. > > Having said that, one of the advantages that I would see by having this > added to BES is that developers of the interface would also have to > worry about providing the information, which would save us the trouble > :) We could then create a simple adaptor to extract the information > and pull it into the parallel information system. > In order to achieve this, a simple interface such as an XML document > would suffice. Examples of such documents can be found on the GLUE 2.0 > wiki page. > > http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.glue-wg/wiki/GLUE2XMLSchema > > Laurence > > Andrew Grimshaw wrote: >> Laurence, >> >> I agree completely. During the BES discussion we came to an impasse over >> this: some arguing that that we could use WS-RF resource properties ... and >> then have a single mechanism for all types of resources. Others, including >> but not limited to Microsoft, would have nothing to do with WS-RF. In the >> end to get consensus the WG decided on a separate function - very ugly. We >> in Genesis II support both the WS-RF mechanism and the OGSA-BES mechanism. >> The same thing by the way happened over notification, except in the end the >> WG basically punted. >> >> I personally think that the BES endpoint should provide a mechanism to get >> the information, but that the spec should be mute on how that information is >> aggregated or used. >> >> A >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pgi-wg mailing list > Pgi-wg at ogf.org > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: oxana_smirnova.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 270 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/jsdl-wg/attachments/20090715/32a86243/attachment.vcf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2357 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/jsdl-wg/attachments/20090715/32a86243/attachment.bin From Steven.Newhouse at cern.ch Wed Jul 15 01:28:07 2009 From: Steven.Newhouse at cern.ch (Steven Newhouse) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:28:07 +0200 Subject: [jsdl-wg] [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th In-Reply-To: <4A5CDABD.3090709@cern.ch> References: <4A5C525E.5000509@pd.infn.it> <4A5CDABD.3090709@cern.ch> Message-ID: <471AD4CD1F3AC846911E0C520A522E72044FE9F1@cernxchg74.cern.ch> > Within the current EGEE/WLCG infrastructure there are no plans > for the foreseeable future to move away from the current mechanism, the > need to expose this information via BES is not a requirement for it to > be deployed on the infrastructure. Therefore if any such interface is defined in a future version of BES it should be encapsulated in its own optional port type. Steven From grimshaw at virginia.edu Wed Jul 15 14:33:36 2009 From: grimshaw at virginia.edu (Andrew Grimshaw) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:33:36 -0400 Subject: [jsdl-wg] [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th In-Reply-To: <4A5D09F6.9010408@hep.lu.se> References: <4A5C525E.5000509@pd.infn.it> <4A5CDABD.3090709@cern.ch> <922E3100F6D44EAE956AE2589F2D6406@cs.virginia.edu><4A5D0259.4010607@cern.ch> <4A5D09F6.9010408@hep.lu.se> Message-ID: <7DF0F58740EC4AABBD12F3D3050615EF@cs.virginia.edu> Oxana, I think you may have mis-interpreted what I meant. I think different interfaces for different functions is important. I was referring to a single interface for discovering resource properties|meta data|attributes. So that one can gather resource properties (perhaps including what interfaces the resource implements) in a uniform way - much like reflection interfaces in Java. Where and how the information to respond to resource property queries is irrelevant to me ... is it generated on the fly, is it variables in memory, is it stored in some database, I don't care. I just want to be able to ask for it. Similarly, if someone wants to build an "information service" that logically keeps the resource properties of many resources and allows me to query that, that is great too. How they get that information is not my concern. What that "information service" interface is I do care about. It has been debated quite a bit: many arguing against WS and XML representation as too slow and complex, instead arguing for a straight RDBMS interface with well-defined schema; others arguing for the full flexibility of extensible XML schema's. While I think the information service interface is important, I think it will be difficult to reach consensus as infrastructures tend to have their own well developed techniques. I think therefore that we should keep it out of scope for our discussions on the execution service. A > -----Original Message----- > From: pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf Of > Oxana Smirnova > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 6:43 PM > To: pgi-wg at ogf.org > Cc: jsdl-wg at ogf.org > Subject: Re: [Pgi-wg] Next teleconference: tomorrow, wednesday july 15th > > Hi all, > > FWIW, I have mixed feelings on this issue. 4 years ago I thought it would > be just great to have exactly the same interface and end-point for job > submission/management, for information query, and for file management. We > even do have the same interface for job and file management: job is > largely characterized by a set of files, after all. And information > persistency may well be realized as a set of files, too - why not. But > then I killed a job by accident, being sure I deleted a file. So now I > think a clear separation is a good think to do. > > Cheers, > Oxana > > 2009-07-15 00:10, Laurence Field ?????: > > Hi Andrew, > > > > With the diverse types of services that we deal with in our > > infrastructure, I can't imagine a situation where they have all > > implemented an interface using the same technology. This is due to many > > factors including but not limited to: legacy, time scales, priories, > > ideologies, trends, fads etc. > > However, we have to somehow link all these services together, which is > > why I believe that a parallel system is the most flexible option. If an > > agreed information interface emerges, the exiting interfaces could be > > extended to provide this but the only advantage I see is aesthetics > > rather than function. > > > > Having said that, one of the advantages that I would see by having this > > added to BES is that developers of the interface would also have to > > worry about providing the information, which would save us the trouble > > :) We could then create a simple adaptor to extract the information > > and pull it into the parallel information system. > > In order to achieve this, a simple interface such as an XML document > > would suffice. Examples of such documents can be found on the GLUE 2.0 > > wiki page. > > > > http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.glue- > wg/wiki/GLUE2XMLSchema > > > > Laurence > > > > Andrew Grimshaw wrote: > >> Laurence, > >> > >> I agree completely. During the BES discussion we came to an impasse > over > >> this: some arguing that that we could use WS-RF resource properties ... > and > >> then have a single mechanism for all types of resources. Others, > including > >> but not limited to Microsoft, would have nothing to do with WS-RF. In > the > >> end to get consensus the WG decided on a separate function - very ugly. > We > >> in Genesis II support both the WS-RF mechanism and the OGSA-BES > mechanism. > >> The same thing by the way happened over notification, except in the end > the > >> WG basically punted. > >> > >> I personally think that the BES endpoint should provide a mechanism to > get > >> the information, but that the spec should be mute on how that > information is > >> aggregated or used. > >> > >> A > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pgi-wg mailing list > > Pgi-wg at ogf.org > > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg From andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com Mon Jul 27 22:48:39 2009 From: andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com (Andreas Savva) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:48:39 +0900 Subject: [jsdl-wg] JSDL Teleconference - 29 July 2009 **@12:00pm UTC** Message-ID: Agenda: 1. Agenda bashing & quick status update 2. Activity instance document schema - Progress on issues/actions on tracker https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/projects.jsdl-wg/tracker.activity_schema - Draft discussion 3. Other business ===== Full call-in details ==== Date: 29 July 2009 Time: UTC: 12:00 PM EUROPE: BST 1 PM / CEST 2 PM US: EDT 8 AM ASIA: JST 9 PM Duration: 1 hour Dial-in numbers (toll): US: +1 718 3541071 (New York) or +1 408 9616509 (San Jose) UK: +44 207 3655269 (London) Germany: +49 (0)69 50070802 (Frankfurt) Japan: +81 3 3570 8225 (Tokyo) Other countries: http://tinyurl.com/eg48j User guide: http://tinyurl.com/qknrf Teleconference participant PIN: 4371991 Screen share: http://jsdl.glance.net/?key=0729 Note: When you dial in after the initial message in English for the PIN there is another message in Japanese only (sorry) to state your name and press '#' in order to join the call. -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd From philipp.wieder at udo.edu Wed Jul 29 06:54:11 2009 From: philipp.wieder at udo.edu (Philipp Wieder) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:54:11 +0200 Subject: [jsdl-wg] Call today? Message-ID: <4A703863.40909@udo.edu> Hi Andreas, do we have a call today? Best regards, Philipp.